GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Mobile vs Radeon R9 370

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 370 with GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Mobile, including specs and performance data.

R9 370
2015
4 GB GDDR5, 110 Watt
12.29

GTX 1650 Ti Mobile outperforms R9 370 by an impressive 65% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking406277
Place by popularitynot in top-10062
Power efficiency7.7127.97
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameTrinidadTU116
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date5 May 2015 (9 years ago)23 April 2020 (4 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores12801024
Core clock speed925 MHz1350 MHz
Boost clock speed975 MHz1485 MHz
Number of transistors2,800 million6,600 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)110 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate78.0095.04
Floating-point processing power2.496 TFLOPS3.041 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs8064

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop sizeno datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length221 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinno data

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1400 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth179.2 GB/s192.0 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortNo outputs
HDMI+-

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (11_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.140
CUDA-7.5

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

R9 370 12.29
GTX 1650 Ti Mobile 20.28
+65%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

R9 370 4722
GTX 1650 Ti Mobile 7796
+65.1%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

R9 370 5249
GTX 1650 Ti Mobile 9930
+89.2%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD45
−28.9%
58
+28.9%
1440p24−27
−79.2%
43
+79.2%
4K14−16
−78.6%
25
+78.6%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 42
+0%
42
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 59
+0%
59
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 59
+0%
59
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 36
+0%
36
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 40
+0%
40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 95
+0%
95
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 68
+0%
68
+0%
Metro Exodus 66
+0%
66
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 44
+0%
44
+0%
Valorant 98
+0%
98
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30
+0%
30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 32
+0%
32
+0%
Dota 2 90
+0%
90
+0%
Far Cry 5 70
+0%
70
+0%
Fortnite 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 75
+0%
75
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 45
+0%
45
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 76
+0%
76
+0%
Metro Exodus 45
+0%
45
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 29
+0%
29
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Valorant 48
+0%
48
+0%
World of Tanks 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 52
+0%
52
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 25
+0%
25
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 29
+0%
29
+0%
Dota 2 112
+0%
112
+0%
Far Cry 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 63
+0%
63
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 47
+0%
47
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Valorant 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 17
+0%
17
+0%
World of Tanks 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 41
+0%
41
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 16
+0%
16
+0%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 28
+0%
28
+0%
Metro Exodus 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Valorant 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Dota 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 22
+0%
22
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6
+0%
6
+0%
Dota 2 52
+0%
52
+0%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 14
+0%
14
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

This is how R9 370 and GTX 1650 Ti Mobile compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1650 Ti Mobile is 29% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1650 Ti Mobile is 79% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 1650 Ti Mobile is 79% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 12.29 20.28
Recency 5 May 2015 23 April 2020
Chip lithography 28 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 110 Watt 50 Watt

GTX 1650 Ti Mobile has a 65% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 133.3% more advanced lithography process, and 120% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 370 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 370 is a desktop card while GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Mobile is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD Radeon R9 370
Radeon R9 370
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Mobile
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Mobile

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


4 425 votes

Rate Radeon R9 370 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 1727 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.